In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

147 CHAPTER SEVEN A Case for Integrated Parenthood Margaret F. Brinig This chapter makes a case for the integrative model of the family and of parenthood . More specifically, it argues for supporting the formal, legally recognized statuses of husband/wife and parent/child. In general, children do better in both the short and long term if they live with married parents and if they are biological or adopted children of these parents. Children are particularly affected by the stability and permanence of their relationships , although they are famously resilient. Under any circumstances, parental warmth affects children significantly and positively. One of the more dramatic ways to see the influence of parental relationships involves mixed-race marriages because they tend to be of shorter duration. The mixed-race case, where children do fine only so long as their parents stay together, reveals the importance of community as well as intentions of parents for children’s outcomes. Community includes the formal community denoted by legal status, the family’s religious community (especially important for African American families), and the peer community, which particularly influences older children. Stable marriages may provide a kind of buffer for fathers, who on their own may prefer sons to daughters. Marriage has been described in the literature as a gender factory.1 It also serves as a factory for producing healthy children and contributing citizens, for children profit from stability, continuity, and love. In my earlier work, I note that families produce not only material goods or future workers for the labor force but also children who later will be able to love unconditionally.2 The effects I will describe can thus be characterized as having both short- and long-run effects. Because children seem malleable and do not have effective political lobbies, it is easy for public policy makers to argue that what adults do does not matter as far as children are concerned. Parenthetically, this also makes it easier to sound politically correct and to seem to clearly separate poverty from intimate decision making (which, after all, is a constitutional right in the United States).3 So far, the empirical work I have done is limited to different-sex couples and parents. Other scholars can show, using some of the same data sets, 148 Margaret F. Brinig what happens if parents are of the same gender.4 In the next chapter, Fiona Tasker reviews this literature, concluding that this type of family form makes very little difference to child development, especially as compared with access to resources, social systems, and family dynamics (especially between co-parents).5 Further, most of my results necessarily cannot show causation, only relationships between variables. In these, causation may run in either direction, or the relationship may actually be caused by some variable that is not considered in my models. The results will at least be consistent with the hypothesis considered. Further, the small R2 of the underlying equations (i.e., how much of the variance in the result is explained by the equation) shows that they do not explain all, or even a substantial part, of the variance in results. While I will begin with groups representative of society in general, I will have something to say about the African American subgroup, which displays quite different results. I also include some results for children whose race differs from that of one or more of their parents, who seem sensitive to family forms involving divorce or where their parents have never married, and who, unfortunately, are more likely than most children to see their parents divorce or their nonmarital relationship dissolve. Finally, because my results usually use large, longitudinal , nationally representative samples, while being scientifically more reliable , they may miss the individual stories that qualitative studies provide. Literature on Formal and Informal Relationships I begin with a very quick literature review. Many scholars, including some contributors to this book, have written about the negative effects of divorce onchildren.6 Theconsensusseemstobethatwhenthevastmajorityofcouplesdivorce —allthoseexceptcouplesinveryhigh-conflictmarriages—children do less well.7 While there is some debate about how long it takes children to recover from relationship disruption,8 it does seem to follow that childrenofdivorcearelesssuccessfulintheirownmarriages.Theyaremore likelytocohabitandaremorelikelytodivorcethemselves.Itisalsoclearthat cohabitingrelationshipsarelesslikelytobestablethanmarriedones,9 even incountrieswherethereisthesamegovernmentalsupportforbothkindsof families,andevenwhentherearechildren.PaulAmatohasshownthat,just as men seem to benefit from less than high-quality marriages, children do bettereveninunhappymarriagesthanwhentheirparentsdivorce(exceptin caseswherethereisfamilyviolencetowhichchildrenareexposed).10 There has also been significant writing on African American (black) families. One obvious observation is that fewer black children live with two [18.118.200.136] Project MUSE (2024-04-19...

Share